The National Health Service (NHS) MUST be completely abolished
I’m going to try something. I’m going to state my position and a few brief reasons why I hold it. I’m then going to open up the comments section for you guys to tell me a) why I’m wrong b) why you agree mostly but you have x concern that means we need an NHS or c) any personal experiences you’ve had with the NHS that might influence my opinion that you’d like to add. This can be as an employee or a patient. I will then attempt to flesh out this article with answers to some of these common concerns, arguments etc.
WHY THE NHS ABSOLUTELY MUST BE ABOLISHED ENTIRELY
1) The NHS is entirely funded through stolen tax payer money and is therefore inherently unjust
2) Even if you believe taxation is not unjust, the NHS must still be abolished entirely because it is completely unaccountable, unresponsive and terrible at the job of providing medical care
3) The NHS has perverse incentives which is ruining the important job of providing healthcare. People are dying because healthcare is being misallocated, overconsumed, underprovided in certain areas etc. etc.
4) The NHS does not produce innovation, the cost of everything is going up and the waiting lines are increasing.
5) Poor people are forced to use the NHS because they cannot opt out of paying taxes, therefore they find it almost impossible to go private because they are literally being asked to pay twice.
6) Because the NHS does not have the profit/loss incentives of the free market, its employees have no incentive to be friendly, efficient or do their job well. If they fuck up, they don’t lose money (because their wages are simply stolen from people). In fact often they gain money because they can argue their failures are because their budget isn’t high enough. This isn’t an argument that there are no good people working in the NHS but simply that on the average, they are always going to be ruder, more unreasonable and slower than people working in the private sector.
In Summary the NHS is causing poor people to die, stifling medical innovation and plundering our wealth through forced taxation. The institution is unaccountable, wasteful and growing all the time without producing better results.
It must be abolished.
Tell me why I’m wrong.
09/12/2009 Chris makes the following objections
1) ’stolen’ implies the taxation is unlawful, when of course it isn’t. If you disagree with the law(s) passed to enforce taxation, please say why.
In my opening post I laid out the libertarian philosophy. Unlike traditional politics libertarian politics holds certain things immoral l REGARDLESS of whether some bureaucrats have written it down in a book or not. Most people agree that just because something is a law doesn’t make it automatically okay. For example, slavery was once enforced by law. Libertarians object to taxation because it it the forceful stealing of money, something we do not accept in any other part of our lives.
2) how would you make the NHS more accountable? There may be a website where you can post your views/suggestions.
how would you make the NHS more responsive? I assume this is in relation to things like how quickly ambulances arrive, which are not entirely within the control of the NHS
you say that the NHS is ‘terrible at the job of providing medical care’, I assume in comparison to paying to go private. you acknowledge that this is not an option for everyone, so how could the NHS provide better medical care?
I wouldn’t make the NHS “more accountable” because I couldn’t. It is impossible. Government agencies are inherently unaccountable because 1) People cannot withdraw their funding voluntarily and 2) the employees from the ground up to the very top dogs don’t have the right incentives to please their customers. In the private sector if you fuck up you lose your customers and you lose money. In the NHS if you fuck up you get a bigger budget the next year.
Same goes for speed of ambulances etc. There are many people inside the system who want to do a good efficient job but unfortunately, on the average, the incentives are horribly distorted because it is a government agency and therefore everything will be done less efficiently than on a free voluntary market.
I do indeed mean in comparison to private companies. I acknowledge that in our current system not everybody can go private. I want the abolition of the NHS and for every single £pound to be left in the hands of the people to prepare for their own medical care. For those few people who are so poor they cannot afford insurance, I want individuals and local charity to pick up the slack. If anybody doubts that people care about the poor getting sick and worries they would not pay to such charities all I can say is that every single person I’ve ever spoken to about libertarian ideas has brought this issue up first, everybody is concerned about it, so everybody should be willing to help as individuals unless they are hypocrites.
3) I’d agree that NHS provision isn’t the same everywhere, so it will be better in some places than others.
NHS provision will never be properly distributed because it’s funds aren’t properly appropriated. When you run your company through theft, you do not have the correct profit/loss incentives to correctly distribute scarce resources. Remember the shortages and bread lines in the Soviet Union.
4) I did not know that the NHS had to produce innovation, is this a legal requirement? Obviously, innovative use of funds is a good idea. I assume that costs are dependent on outside factors (including those caused by private companies) and I would guess that long waiting lists are caused by poor management of scarce resources.
It does not have a legal or moral obligation to do so. I was simply pointing out that it won’t. It can’t. When taking risks to produce innovations you need the profit/loss incentives of the free market. The UK has been piggy-backing off the medical innovations coming out of America and other countries with freer markets than ours for the last 50 years. And if America totally socialises its system we may be headed into a new medical dark age. I’m sure you can see how this hurts every individual, rich and poor.
And you are absolutely correct about what causes the long waiting lists. The only fallacy is in thinking that government bureaucracies can ever be reformed. The NHS will only continue to grow and become less and less responsive to patients until we finally get rid of it once and for all and transition to a voluntary system of providing healthcare.
5)This works as an argument for helping people with the cost of going private, for people with such rare conditions that only experimental treatments being developed by private companies or overseas have a chance of working. The NHS would argue that they do not have the resources, or it is not their role, to be developing such experimental treatments, or testing them all. Perhaps it should have this role (if it already does, it obviously needs better management/more resources).
I can’t think of anything worse than handing over the role of innovating new medical advances to the UK government. Anything we can do to reducing the size and scope of government is good for the people, anything in the other direction, be it laws, regulations or new departments will only impoverish the people further.
6) Everyone has bad days and some people will never do their job to the best of their abilities. I agree that the financial imperative is a strong force in society, but the NHS isn’t the reason it exists, so it shouldn’t be blamed.
It is true that everybody has bad days and that some people will never do their job to the best of their abilities. However only in government organisations does this behaviour go unpunished. Because we do not have the option of withholding our tax money to fund this massive organisation they are shielded from the correct profit/loss incentives that the free voluntary market provides. If you go to a private vet and the receptionist is rude or the vet does a bad job of fixing Fidos leg you can stop frequenting the business, therefore those workers have a direct incentive to do a better job or the Vet on the other side of town will scoop up their business. If they piss off enough of their customers with bad service, they will go bankrupt. When the NHS pisses off tons of their customers, they get a bigger budget the next year.
Local GP’s around the country often find it an INCONVENIENCE when they have to take on a new patient. If somebody is unhappy with their service or the wait they have to endure to undergo treatment what choice do they have? The surgery does not care whether you are unsatisfied or if you decide to go private because to them, it doesn’t matter if they get your custom or not. Again, individuals in the system may care, but on the aggregate, they will care much less than people operating in the free market.
Another way to put it is there are good people, and there are bad people. In the free market, bad people must still provide a good friendly service to some degree or they will be fired or their business will be uncompetitive to those run by good people. In the government sectors good people are not rewarded and bad people are not fired. In fact in politics often the most sneaky, deceptive and manipulative people rise to the top, and this includes organisations like the NHS with its famous “glass ceiling”.
The NHS could be better, should be better, but scrapping it helps noone. Unless you have a vested interest in private healthcare, of course.
Scrapping it would help no one if it was actually “free” but of course it’s not. To fund this behemoth people have to have a sizeable portion of their income extorted through force. Everybody, including the poor (who taxes actually hurt the most) would be better off being allowed to keep that money and redirect it to the healthcare provider OF THEIR CHOICE. In that situation we would see medical costs rapidly declining, innovation rising and quality of service and wait times DRAMATICALLY increasing.
Thanks for your comment
Elad writes on 11/12/2009
As an employer with the NHS for over 3 years i think i can tell you a few truths about why the system is crap! Lets be honest its not all the nhs fault, due to it being a government funded workforce the there loads of front headed targets therefore staff are unable to supply the best possible treatment, such as the ambualnce, if we get to a job within 8 minutes of a call that is a success even if the patient has died, but if we get there after 8 minutes and the patient lives, we fail to meet the target, and sometimes have a meeting as to why we did not get there in time.
Okay there seems to be a cognitive disconnect between “the NHS” and “the Government”. The NHS IS the government which is why it has all the problems you’ve just mentioned. The individuals working within the NHS might be good hard working people, in fact in the majority I think they are, and it is not them I have a problem with. It is the INSTITUTION of the NHS. And what makes it a unique institution? They are not funded by people valuing their service, either through paying for care or through charity donations. No, instead they are funded through coercion. That is, stolen money (tax). Because of this we get the perverse incentives, ridiculous paper work, misallocation of resources and grinding inefficiency.
Even people who disagree with me will always qualify their statements with stuff like “There are many problems with the NHS”… what I don’t understand is why the good people want to protect the system at all. I can understand why the politicians and the higher ups want to protect it, but the lower downs, the doctors, the nurses, the surgeons would all find similar work in the private sector or in voluntary charity, were the NHS abolished, but now they’d actually get work done and wouldn’t have to deal with all the bullshit.
All clinical staff are accountable for mistakes and are dealt with within the protocol and a company called the Health Proffesions Council may get involved. Go to A&E on a friday and saturday night and see why the nhs is actually abused by the public, count it roughly £1500 per head, with ambulance, treat in A&E then sent home!! i agree that there are too many managers. Also the funding has never increased with inflantion!!! these problems are not the fault of staff but the fault of poor government that don’t provide appropriate targets.
Sorry to be blunt but no, all clinical staff are NOT accountable for mistakes. In fact it is almost impossible to be fired from the NHS and the people who do the investigations work for the same people as the NHS (the government) so their incentives are again distorted. Of course the NHS is abused by the public (although they also pay for it). When you give something away for free, don’t expect people to use it wisely. Without prices, resources get allocated incorrectly. The only way to find the correct prices (because prices are subjective) is on a marketplace. And the NHS does NOT need more funding. It consistently gets bigger and bigger and bigger and bigger and the care gets worse and worse. Money is not the problem. It’s where that money comes from.
you only hear the bad stories, i personally had a couple of jobs, one was a baby who was fitting, from the time they called to the time we got the baby to hospital was 14 minutes, the baby is now living, also had a patient that was having a heart attack, because of the drugs we gave and going to the best hospital for that condition, that patient has a better quality of life, it’s not always bad news!!!
If you would rather go private thats fine, lets end up like USA???? i dont think so
Of course there are cases where good things happen in the NHS. This is because it is staffed by hundreds of thousands of doctors and nurses, most of whom are good people who provide a valuable service. The problem isn’t doctors, nurses and surgeons, IT’S THE NHS AND HOW IT’S FUNDED. I am not in favour of abolishing doctors. These good people would still be employed on a free market, and they would still be saving babies. Please read my FAQ for more on why this fallacy is so ubiquitous.
As to your last point, if I’d like to go private it’s not “fine” because I have had money STOLEN from me to pay for the NHS. If I could opt out of the NHS and spend that money on private care I obviously would because it is vastly superior. As usual, the government program enacted under the guise of “helping the poor” actually hurts them the most because they can’t afford to pay twice, unlike the rich.
Also the USA does not have a free market health care system. It is slightly freer than ours in certain areas, but it is NOT free. Despite this it is still free enough to lead the way with most of the new medical advancements which we piggy back off of. If Obama manages to totally socialise their system, like he wants to, we might find the world entering a new medical dark age, where no country any longer has the necessary profit/loss incentives to invest capital in new medical innovation.
Thanks for your comment.





December 9th, 2009 at 1:09 am
I found your site via a google ad on the guardian’s website.
I have decided to respond to this article.
in order…
1) ’stolen’ implies the taxation is unlawful, when of course it isn’t. If you disagree with the law(s) passed to enforce taxation, please say why.
2) how would you make the NHS more accountable? There may be a website where you can post your views/suggestions.
how would you make the NHS more responsive? I assume this is in relation to things like how quickly ambulances arrive, which are not entirely within the control of the NHS
you say that the NHS is ‘terrible at the job of providing medical care’, I assume in comparison to paying to go private. you acknowledge that this is not an option for everyone, so how could the NHS provide better medical care?
3) I’d agree that NHS provision isn’t the same everywhere, so it will be better in some places than others.
4) I did not know that the NHS had to produce innovation, is this a legal requirement? Obviously, innovative use of funds is a good idea. I assume that costs are dependent on outside factors (including those caused by private companies) and I would guess that long waiting lists are caused by poor management of scarce resources.
5)This works as an argument for helping people with the cost of going private, for people with such rare conditions that only experimental treatments being developed by private companies or overseas have a chance of working. The NHS would argue that they do not have the resources, or it is not their role, to be developing such experimental treatments, or testing them all. Perhaps it should have this role (if it already does, it obviously needs better management/more resources).
6) Everyone has bad days and some people will never do their job to the best of their abilities. I agree that the financial imperative is a strong force in society, but the NHS isn’t the reason it exists, so it shouldn’t be blamed.
The NHS could be better, should be better, but scrapping it helps noone. Unless you have a vested interest in private healthcare, of course.
December 9th, 2009 at 7:22 am
Thank you Chris. This is exactly the kind of stuff I was looking for. I will update the article with answers to these questions.
December 11th, 2009 at 10:36 am
As an employer with the NHS for over 3 years i think i can tell you a few truths about why the system is crap! Lets be honest its not all the nhs fault, due to it being a government funded workforce the there loads of front headed targets therefore staff are unable to supply the best possible treatment, such as the ambualnce, if we get to a job within 8 minutes of a call that is a success even if the patient has died, but if we get there after 8 minutes and the patient lives, we fail to meet the target, and sometimes have a meeting as to why we did not get there in time. All clinical staff are accountable for mistakes and are dealt with within the protocol and a company called the Health Proffesions Council may get involved. Go to A&E on a friday and saturday night and see why the nhs is actually abused by the public, count it roughly £1500 per head, with ambulance, treat in A&E then sent home!! i agree that there are too many managers. Also the funding has never increased with inflantion!!! these problems are not the fault of staff but the fault of poor government that don’t provide appropriate targets.
you only hear the bad stories, i personally had a couple of jobs, one was a baby who was fitting, from the time they called to the time we got the baby to hospital was 14 minutes, the baby is now living, also had a patient that was having a heart attack, because of the drugs we gave and going to the best hospital for that condition, that patient has a better quality of life, it’s not always bad news!!!
If you would rather go private thats fine, lets end up like USA???? i dont think so
December 14th, 2009 at 10:59 am
Elad. Thanks for your comment. I have included it in the original article along with my rebuttal.
December 14th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
Working as a peadiatric nurse I have seen wonders from the NHS, care that is second to none and the quality of life greatly improved for children with conditions that 20 years ago would not have been treated. Ventilated patients being transferred into the community that have care packages worth up to and over £1 million a year each, would private healthcare fund this?
The NHS is innovative and responsive to the needs of the community, while there are mistakes made, this is one of the worlds biggest employers. Management consultants and lack of direction are a problem, however to simply write off the NHS is absurd.
I would be more concerned about going private, although you say staff attitudes are better, the lack of an anesthetist 24/7 would concern me, there are highly trained staff in all areas of the NHS providing first class care. Where care fails to meet standards, staff are accountable, you speak of no impact on pay however every healthcare profession is accountable for their actions and professional bodies will remove a Doctor/Nurse/AHCP from the register.
December 15th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
You might have seen care second to none, but hundreds of thousands of anecdotes tell different, including my own, and many of my friends. I personally had terrible service from my local GP, it was a hassle to register, a hassle to get to the location and then they were rude and unhelpful when I arrived. Contrast that to the private care I got which was prompt and helpful.
Of course when you give an organisation a multi-billion pound budget they will occasionally help sick kids. That is not the issue. The issue is could those same resources be used more efficiently and more ethically in the voluntary free market. The answer is yes. For every instance of somebody being helped in the NHS we hear two more stories about somebody waiting 3 months for a hip operation or a baby dying in a Milton Keynes hospital due to criminal neglect. These things simply never (or incredibly rarely) happen in the private sector. Until you realise the underlying reasons WHY that is true, you will continue to defend the NHS which cannot be reformed.
The NHS is not innovative or responsive to the needs of the community.
The fact that it is one of the world’s biggest employers is not a point in its favour. More a scary reminder of how big this bureaucracy has become.
If free individuals on the free market wanted a 24/7 anaesthetist then a company would fill that gap in the market. Duh.
Staff are only accountable to their bosses, their stupid targets and covering their own backs. They are not accountable to the people who matter: the patients. If you say they are, I call bullshit.
December 16th, 2009 at 3:13 am
yet again i have to step in, you are suggesting that one good case is followed by 2 bad ones??? i have to strongly disagree!!! it should be suggested to you that you sit and watch the type of job in a and e, and even go to follow on to the wards, you will see that is strongly not the case of 2:1 ratio.
I personally have problems with GP’s, not all but there are a high number of poor GP surgery’s to my regret. We have to remind ourselves that the receptionist are NOT CLINICIANS, and once you see your GP s/he cannot refuse treatment or investigation if you have legit reasons.
Clinicians are not accountable to their bossesm, they are accountable to the public, and more so to the Health Proffesions Council (HPC) where on this site you can see who, and for what a clinician has been struck off, or suspeneded.
A company to fill anaesthetist for free???? unlikley!! there will be a charge!! who will pay? you? or the highly rich NHS???
The NHS is responding to the community, for instance beds are being hired to obestric patient, one can cost from £1000 a night!!!! Due to the longer life capacity and the lack of staff and resources, such as beds for recovery, and the rehab hospitals, there is only so many hip ops you can do!!
The press is quick to show a story of bad cases, as i have said before, look at the jobs that i have been to and you will see that there are much more positive and better outcomes to patients than negative.
Not making any excuses but look back a few years ago when fire fighter went on strike for for lack of pay, they go to 2-3 jobs a day (and thats busy), they will not go into anything they deem dangourous, agreed, look at the NHS having to fight for a pay rise, not cared much by management and always get complaints from patients for not being good enough for a much less pay for a greater responsability. we go sometimes 8 straight hours without a break. Staff how work in these type of field are not there for the money they are there for the people.
I find this disheartening that you personally don’t trust the nhs mostly because you read paper articles, if this is the case, i hope you will not fall ill!!
December 16th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
No offence but I think you are reading what I’ve wrote at a very superficial level. You keep repeating cliches and don’t seem to understand the libertarian position at all.
I don’t know if there is an exact 2:1 ratio. My point is simply that one positive anecdote you have will be cancelled out by a bunch of negative ones by other people. And that the positive things that happen would happen anyway in a free market. It’s not like people don’t want medical care.
The HPC is a government agency just like the NHS they are not accountable to the public. They SAY they are but that is very different from reality. Private industry is accountable to the public. If I get bad service I can INSTANTLY punish that company by no longer using their services. THAT is direct accountability. Some individuals in the NHS might care about providing quality care, but the institution as a whole does not have the correct incentives to provide fast, individualised and quality healthcare because whether they provide it or not, they still get paid.
A company might charge, yes, but 95% of people could, and should, pay. Food is as essential as medical care and yet we trust the free market to provide us with that and you don’t see 4 month wait lines for Christmas turkey in ASDA. For the 5% who maybe are dirt poor there would be private charity to pick up the slack. The “highly rich” NHS is only highly rich because it takes money away from all other individuals. If those individuals kept their money they could spend it more efficiently on private healthcare! The NHS STEALS its money. It is not “free healthcare” because we are all stolen from to provide this “service”.
I know many in the system work hard. I’m not against hard working doctors. I’m against the NHS. All you guys (if you are as good as you claim) will find work in the private sector (for profit, or charity) if the NHS is abolished.
I don’t listen to anything the papers say whatsoever. My arguments against the NHS are based on philosophy and economics. If you reply again without understanding this, our conversation might be at an impass. As for the fire-fighters: I am completely against state run fire fighting and believe the entire institution should also be abolished. Happy?
December 17th, 2009 at 2:58 am
once again i urge you to look at the situation in the USA, charity companies will still need to be funded, health care is not cheap, the problem goes way to deep and into the drug company and other providers to the health origin, you cannot compare between a supermarket and health providers. If it is abolished and private health care takes over you will see a drop in patients recieving health care because of cost implications, the costs for anything are huge, its not for the actual drug, its for the whole package. An average call out of an ambulance, without treatment, is about £300-£500, this includes running costs, wages, and maintence.
For instance, an elderly patient falls breaks a hip, ambulance is called, £300, A&E admissions £600 with x-rays, admissions to a ward for a 2-3week stay at best with surgery looking at easy £4,000 plus, physio, rehab hospital for another month so they can learn to walk again £2,000 extra home equpiment £500. Now for a private company, lets add a profit margin??
I don’t think you are person that has fully needed the health care to it’s maximum potential and therefore are unable to make such an informed judgement that the nhs is to be abolished
You need to ask a handfull of people in the USA and see what happened there, people are crossing boarders to canada for help!!! you want to swim to France?? the only thing that is stolen are the people that aviod tax and still use the system. I belive that not everything should be free from the NHS (which is not), but people are to scared to stand up and say more things are to be charged.
I am not happy with some of the health carers that are slack and and make it worse for patients, i now that the people that are as good as we say we are do not want to work for private companies, but for the NHS and charities.
Health care is ever changing and the NHS try to meet demands of the patients whilst keeping the governamnt targets happy.
The NHS is under funded, and admitted poorly managed, but hey we all think we can do better!!
January 10th, 2010 at 3:32 am
During the process of moving the blog to the new host I lost a few comments. Here is one originally posted by Adam on the 6th of the 1st 2009:
“The reason why private care is vastly superior and the reason why the staff are so much politer is simply the number of people coming through the door. I know from experience, I’ve had private care before and, yes, it was fantastic, even though I didn’t pay for it my employer did. Having said that, I’ve also had fantastic care from the NHS and the differences in the number of people in the two places couldn’t be more different.
It is easy for a nurse who cares for only maybe two or three patients, each of whom is in a separate room, not a ward, to give that more personal and friendly service. If we didn’t have the NHS, how soon would it be before the private hospital is overcrowded, the same doctors and nurses would be working in the same hospitals and while there would be less patients because of the cost, they would still be over-worked and therefore less inclined to be friendly.
As for staff at a GP surgery being rude, how many people do you think they see in a day, how many people do you think are registered at a GP that the receptionists have to manage? Is it a surprise that these people can sometimes be rude? Some of the people they are forced to serve can be extremely rude to them, and are you telling me you’ve never had a bad day in your life when you’ve gone around biting everyone’s heads off?
As for the taxes being stolen, yes we complain about them, but how many of the poorer people in society would willingly pay for certain services if they didn’t have to, they would think that their money is better spent elsewhere. How soon would it be before our streets are overflowing with refuse? How soon would crime go through the roof when the jobless aren’t getting benefits? Oh, but all the jobless are criminals and spongers anyway I hear you cry.
However, while there is a minority of people who are on benefits and still commit crime, and people who will forever be on benefits, most people who go ‘on the dole’ don’t really want to be there. I’ve been on the dole, I have been jobless twice, once for six months and once for two months, in 16 years of working life, and if I hadn’t had the right to claim benefits due to the enforced taxation the government puts upon us, then I likely would have soon had nowhere to live and my children and I would have starved before I could have got another job.
I could go on for ever like this and while I actually agree with a lot of what you say, and while the current system is far from perfect, the system you say should replace it with would, I feel be far worse.”
January 10th, 2010 at 3:33 am
And here is my response which was also lost:
“It might look like the reason the care is better and friendlier is because of the numbers of people, but it’s just not true. That’s an illusion. It’s because the NHS doesn’t have the necessary incentives to be polite and efficient just like no government agency does. Millions shop at Tescos every day but they are still fast efficient and most of their staff smile and offer to pack your bags. This is because if they don’t, you shop elsewhere. The NHS doesn’t worry about that. They get paid regardless of their service.
Also part of the reason so many people walk through the doors of the NHS is because it is “free”, nobody has an incentive to think about whether they actually need to go to the doctor or not. People feel like if they are being forced to pay for the “service” out of taxes they might as well get their money’s worth etc.
Part of getting rid of taxes and government is allowing the people to privately own property and land. People who own their own property have an incentive to look after it. It’s not an accident that it’s government housing and government land that is often the most dilapidated and dirty.
Thanks for your comment by the way. I think you’d get a lot from a book called economics in one lesson, it’s available for free on the internet if you google it, or you can pick it up cheap on amazon.”
January 11th, 2010 at 1:11 pm
“Poor people are forced to use the NHS because they cannot opt out of paying taxes, therefore they find it almost impossible to go private because they are literally being asked to pay twice.”
Your solution would be to abolish the NHS and let them rely solely on private healthcare.
Yet in the US, where people are forced to rely on private healthcare, many people simply can’t afford it and are left to fend for themselves, or left penniless. What makes you think that the same wouldn’t happen in the UK?
A private healthcare provider has no direct responsibility or incentive to provide good-quality, affordable healthcare. It has a responsibility to its stockholders to maximise profits. It may provide cheap, good-quality healthcare if this is the best way to maximise profits. Or it may, like many US health insurance providers, decide that the best way is to take customers’ insurance premiums and then avoid paying out wherever possible.
January 11th, 2010 at 10:14 pm
[...] Economics, Letters, NHS A user by the name of “bma” left the following comment on the NHS must be completely abolished article, the quote at the beginning is mine from that original page: “Poor people are forced to use the [...]
January 11th, 2010 at 10:16 pm
I was going to respond to you here, but it was going on a bit, so I made the reply it’s own post:
http://theuklibertarian.com/?p=256
July 16th, 2010 at 8:48 pm
Hi. Love your site.
I count myself as a libertarian in my world view… but I am also a doctor… who has happened to work in the health care systems of 3 different countries (UK, NZ, and Australia) and who is a keen observer of the American experience.
The health care issue is so thorny that it sometimes makes me doubt my whole libertarian philosophy. Just seeing the ‘private lite’ systems in the southern hemisphere has left a bad taste in my mouth. Hearing reports of how the American system works fills me with horror.
My conclusions are that healthcare as a market doesn’t work because…
1) Drug companies in a free market have very little incentive to do R+D in the areas that would really make a difference. Huge amounts of research and advertising cash is literally wasted on making the 12th different statin or the 6th different ACEI… this is because it is a surer bet to make ‘me too’ drugs than to make an anti-malarial that would potentially save millions.
2) Prevention is often better than cure in disease. When I worked in NZ I saw quite clearly what you might expect… it was the people with chronic diseases with minimal short term problems like diabetes and hypertension that never came to the doctor. By the time they did they had retinopathy or heart attacks… too late… and too expensive for society as well as the individuals in the long run.
3) A moral society can’t stand by whilst someone sick dies in the street for want of basic healthcare. That causes major problems when you want to go to a totally free market economy. Even in the US where they have some meagre safety net… there a thousands of stories of families ripped apart by medical bills that insurance companies refused to pay / middle class families who couldn’t afford to even contemplate insurance.
4) Healthcare is one of the few areas in life where more is not necessarily better. A middle class American with good health insurance will receive much more medical intervention to prevent illness than a Brit by way of regular colonscopies, yearly prostate cancer blood tests, multiple investigations for minor illnesses etc etc. To a layperson this seems to be a much better system. He is getting lots of checks for cancer and lots of tests when he is ill – that must be better right? The arguments and statistics in this area are very complex… I hope you can give me some credit here for knowing the area in some detail… and accept my assertion that Investigations done without very careful consideration can actually CAUSE morbidity and mortality on a large scale. Unfortunately when you incentivise health care systems to do more (as always happens in private systems) you end up giving a poorer more dangerous service.
5) The idea that the American system is more advanced than in the UK is based on some very dubious figures. There are exceptional illnesses and circumstances where you might be better off in the US system… but on balance… from a population wide perspective the US is grossly inefficient and dangerous.
I don’t have any answers. My simple cop out is that we go for a libertarian society… but retain a standing army, a police force and a universal health care system… but leave the rest to the free market. But I could imagine that a teacher could be up next arguing the case for education as well….. and then the fireman pipes up….etc etc ad infinitum.
Sigh.
July 20th, 2010 at 10:32 pm
Hey “thedoc” glad you enjoy the site
I hope you don’t mind but I’m posting your comment to the forums in order to get some discussion going. As you put so much effort into your comment I think you deserve to get some decent replies. Thread is here
These are my initial thoughts: